Soncino English Talmud
Arakhin
Daf 22b
[THE PROPERTY] OF ORPHANS WHICH HAS BEEN VALUED [MUST BE PROCLAIMED FOR] THIRTY DAYS, AND [THE PROPERTY OF] THE SANCTUARY WHICH HAS BEEN VALUED [FOR] SIXTY DAYS; THE PROCLAMATION MUST BE MADE IN THE MORNING AND IN THE EVENING. Now what case are we dealing with? Would you say with that of a heathen creditor; would he agree [to wait]? Hence it is obvious that it is with that of an Israelite creditor. This then will be in accord with the view of R. Huna the son of R. Joshua, for he will interpret it as referring to the case where he who admitted [the debt]. But according to R. Papa this will present a difficulty? — R. Papa will tell you: If you like, I can tell you the reference is to a kethubah, the reason being ‘for favour's sake’! Or if you like, I can tell you the reference is to a heathen creditor who accepted upon himself to have his case dealt with in accord with Israelite law. But if he accepted that upon himself, let him agree to wait until they are of age? — He accepted the law in the one respect, but he did not accept it in the other respect. 1 Come and hear: For the purpose of paying a woman her kethubah or a creditor his debt. Now what case are we dealing with? Would you say that of a heathen creditor, but would he agree? Hence it is evident that we deal with that of an Israelite creditor. That then will be right on the view of R. Huna the son of R. Joshua. for he will interpret it as referring to the case where the debtor admitted [his debt]. But according to R. Papa: Granted that in the case of a kethubah, where the reason may be ‘for favour's sake’, but the case of the creditor would present a difficulty? — [No,] [Indeed] I can maintain it deals with a heathen creditor, but in the case where he accepted upon himself to be judged in accord with the laws of Israel. But if he accepted that, let him accept to wait until they are of age? — He accepted upon himself the one thing, but not the other. Raba said: [We do not distrain upon the orphans’ property] because of [a possible] quittance.2 R. Huna the son of R. Joshua said to Raba: But do we consider [the possibility of] a quittance? Did we not learn: If a woman3 collects [her kethubah] in his absence, she can do so only by means of an oath. And R. Aha, Commander of the Fortress, said: A case came before R. Isaac the Smith in Antiochia, and he decided, We have learnt4 that only in the case of a kethubah ‘for favour's sake’, but not in the case of a creditor. Raba, however, in the name of R. Nahman, said: Also in the case of a creditor.5 Now, if we should consider the [possibility] of a quittance, let us consider it there too? — There the reason is as we have stated it: Lest anyone take his neighbour's possession and depart for maritime provinces.6 Raba said: The law is. We do not distrain upon the property of orphans, but if he [the father] said: ‘Give’, then we distrain upon it. If he said, ‘[Give] this field’, or ‘this mina’, we distrain upon it without appointing a guardian.7 But if he said, ‘[Give] a field’, or ‘a mina’, we distrain upon it and appoint a guardian. The Nehardeans say: In each case we distrain upon it and appoint a guardian, except if it be found that the field does not belong to him,8 for we do not assume that the witnesses9 testified falsely. R. Ashi said: Therefore we do not distrain [upon the property of orphans];10 for Raba said: The law is that we do not distrain upon [the property of orphans]. But where we distrain upon it, we appoint a guardian for the Nehardeans said. In every case11 we distrain upon [the property of orphans] and appoint a guardian. except in the case where it be found that the field does not belong to him, because we do not assume that the witnesses have testified falsely. purely commercial case of a creditor. Therefore the latter must await the debtor's return, hold at the proper price. etc.
Sefaria
Mesoret HaShas